Dissenting in Concurrence
Mar 20, 2024•1 hr 38 min•Season 4Ep. 169
Episode description
The Trump v. Anderson lead balloon continues to smolder. This episode looks at the areas wherein the concurring Justices took issue with the per curiam, and they are many. Indeed, the three Justices who concurred only in the judgment disagree with the scope of the per curiam as well as its particulars, and their concurrence reads more like a dissent. Can we find areas of agreement with ourselves and the concurrences? What can we learn from all this? CLE credit is available from podcast.njsba.com.
For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android
Open in Metacast